​​​​

This quote is also from my addendum (supplement) to my first report (continued from previous day's quote):

The process works something like this, from what I know of it: If a tube does not fit, like the frequently unfitting (part number) tube, instead of just writing a PAR (Product Action Request), like they used to do, and getting the tube mockup shop to come out and bend the tube until it fits the installation, per the "new process," the shop writes a PAR, and gets the tube mockup shop to come out and bend the tube until it fits the installation (sounds like Deja Vu, huh?). Then, additional steps are performed in the new undocumented process that weren’t part of the old undocumented process. Tube mockup then takes the tube that was reworked without anyone’s but shop’s authorization, I guess, to their shop and they "laser tracker" it on their machine, "tweak" the tube, or manipulate the laser tracker measurements [we wouldn’t know if they did this or not, as we do not do the laser tracker measurements of the tubes, and we aren’t certified to operate the machine anyway (if certification is required), yet maybe the tube shop personnel are not certified to operate the machine either, for all we know--you might want to check on this] until they get the machine to spit out a report that states that the tube, after illegal rework, still conforms to the Catia bend data. Then they bring it back out to shop and have us, line QA, bless the tube and/or it’s laser tracker report somehow, and shop installs the tube.